We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
In comparison, NFSU with ₹2254 government grant is garnering all the attention with its massive enhancement and expansion plans, and playing a central role in the national narrative.
How do you know they didnt complain? Did you look? Why do you think the IBA did testing in the first place? Because the women were complaining!
Trying to confuse the language which we use when we discuss sex directly leads to misinformation and it leads to confusion and ultimately- the erasure of the female sex class.
In many countries it is illegal to say anything offensive about certain religions. Fortunately we arent one of them. And most civilised people would agree that blasphemy laws are wrong because they do not allow for free speech and deliberation. Laws do not alone make morality. and Laws of other countries do not make impose obligations or punishments in this one.
2) You start arguing that there is no evidence at all- Which isnt true. The IBA findings are public- their statement explicitly state that these athletes were administered a sex test which was not a testosterone test and they failed the eligibility for female. Even if you dont trust the IBA- there is the fact that neither the taiwanese nor the algerian appealed the IBA decision. The IBA mind you conducted two tests with two independent labs once in 2022 and once in 2023. Both consistent findings.
Add to this the IOC first issued a statement that "this wasnt a DSD case" and then corrected themselves- leading any sane individual to conclude that this was a DSD case. Otherwise why make the correction?
Then add to that the president of world boxing saying Imane Khelif is male- you now have multiple people who have seen the sex test results confirming its an XY male with a DSD.
3) Even if you discard all of that as not conclusive proof. Shouldnt the IOC then have a duty of care for its female athletes and honestly even for the alleged males to test them with a cheek swab and clear all controversy? Arent the interests of female athletes in safety and fairness worth protecting at the olympics? Arent the interests of the alleged males in avoiding controversy worth protecting?
4) Failing all of that- Why does the womens category exist? Is it to let anyone compete who claims they are a woman? or is to create fair and safe sports for half of the population that has different biology? If it is the latter- which it has to be because of the history of how womens sports came to be- then shouldnt the operating principle be that you safeguard the female space? That you dont let someone in if you suspect they are male unless they prove otherwise?
5) failing that even- what youre asking people to do is to prove a negative. Prove that ▮▮▮ isnt female. Which no one can do unless Imane Khelif agrees to a cheek swab test. And unless that proof is given everyone - no matter their history, no matter the credibility of allegations against them, no matter previous testing and no matter the evidence of our own eyes- should be allowed in the womens category. Do you think womens sport would continue to exist if that standard was truly to apply?
6) Failing that even- you argue that me thinking she is male doesnt make her male, but her thinking she is female makes her female? Do you think male and female are just make believe? what is an identity? is it completely internal and psychological? if I think im superman am i superman? if ben shapiro thinks hes a black guy does he become back? Or does identity have to do with the social world? If you and I see a baby girl and we both agree shes a baby girl as opposed to a baby boy does she become a baby girl? Or is this not about identity- as nebulous a concept that is at all- but simply about biology? XY/ XX/ whatever DSDs you have, whether your biology gives you an unfair advantage? I dont particularly care if Imane Khelif wants to wear dresses and call himself whatever. I care that his biology is making boxing unfair and unsafe for women.
In any case if the IBA results are not credible why would the IOC not conduct their own testing? a simple once in a lifetime cheek swab is all it takes? Why would the IOC not do that much to ensure the women were safe and had fair competition? Why does the benefit of doubt to go the male?
https://telanganatoday.com/nalsar-to-get-another-campus-in-hyderabad-soon
Is there an impending pay match by CAM?
OMG
If a candidate's biggest achievement is the exam they cracked in 12th standard, they do not stand a chance.
The jump in the unemployment rate “points to a recession in 2025”, Gary Clyde Hufbauer, nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told Al Jazeera. “I’m expecting the [US] Fed to start cutting the policy rate in September, and to continue cutting in subsequent meetings. That response will probably ensure a shallow recession,” he added.
The equity markets, too, reacted in fear of a recession. The Dow Jones average tumbled more than 700 points – almost 2 percent – in afternoon trading Friday, and the broader S&P 500 fell 2 percent, with Wall Street banks calling for bigger and more rate cuts than had been expected so far.
Economists at Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, among others, revamped their expectations to a half-point rate cut in September as well as in November, and a quarter-point rate cut in December.
All of this falls on the back of a week of weak data, including a slowdown in manufacturing and negative employment sentiments, which points towards an economic downtrend.
But not everyone agrees with this scenario.
“We don’t see a recession even though the stock market today is behaving like it anticipates a recession,” Nancy Vanden Houten, lead economist at Oxford Economics, told Al Jazeera.
“The jobs report was definitely weaker than most economists were expecting and we’re not dismissing the signs of a softer labour market, but there are things going on beneath the surface” that need to be accounted for while looking at the Friday data, Vanden Houten said.